Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2025 Dec 11;20(12):e0337293. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0337293

A compact design of four-port high-gain MIMO antenna using hybrid coupler and dual-polarized radiators

Phuong Kim-Thi 1,*, Thang Nguyen-Van 2, Dat Nguyen-Tien 3, Tung Bui-Thanh 2
Editor: Sachin Kumar4
PMCID: PMC12697993  PMID: 41379844

Abstract

This paper introduces a design methodology for a multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) antenna that achieves multi-port operation, high gain, as well as compact dimensions. The proposed design employs two dual-polarized radiators integrated with two hybrid couplers. This architecture enables a four-port MIMO array to be realized using only two radiating elements. Meanwhile, the hybrid couplers simultaneously excite both ports of the dual-polarized elements with equal magnitude and a 90 phase difference, facilitating high-gain radiation. To validate the proposed concept, an antenna prototype was fabricated and tested. Measurements confirm that the antenna, with an overall compact size of 0.96λ × 0.77λ × 0.04λ, achieves a 3.1% operating bandwidth (4.72-4.87 GHz) with inter-port isolation better than 10 dB. Within this band, the antenna maintains a measured gain of around 8.0 dBi. Additionally, the antenna also performs good diversity performance in terms of Envelop Correlation Coefficient, Diversity Gain, Channel Capacity Loss, and Mean Effective Gain.

Introduction

Multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) antenna systems have garnered significant attention in modern wireless communication due to their ability to enhance data throughput and spectral efficiency without requiring additional frequency resources [1]. Additionally, as electronic devices are getting smaller and smaller while requiring high channel capacity and long-range communication, there is a strong demand for a MIMO array, which possesses multi-port operation, compact size, as well as high gain radiation.

The microstrip patch antenna has been demonstrated as an effective solution to achieve high gain with compact size structure. Various MIMO patch antennas have been reported in the open literature [26]. These conventional MIMO designs typically rely on single-polarized radiators, where each antenna port is connected to a separate radiating element. As the number of ports increases, this configuration leads to larger antenna footprints. For instance, four radiating elements are required for 4-port MIMO array. A possible solution to design multi-port MIMO with less radiators is to employ dual-polarized patches. This approach has been presented in [710], in which 4-port MIMO array can be realized with only two dual-polarized radiators. Nonetheless, the radiator utilized in [210] working in the fundamental TM01/10 mode performs low-gain radiation, which is typically around 6 dBi. Using a high-order mode patch can increase the gain to about 9-10 dBi, but trade-off with extremely large antenna dimensions [11,12]. Similar gain performance can be achieved by using dielectric resonator structures [13,14].

Improving the gain of MIMO patch antennas is still a challenging task, especially when balancing compactness and the number of uncorrelated waves. The literature review indicates that gain enhancement in MIMO antennas has traditionally been achieved using frequency selective surfaces (FSS) [1517], T-junction power dividers [1820], or a combination of those approaches [2123]. FSS layers placed above the radiators can enhance gain but at the cost of increased vertical profile. Meanwhile, T-junction-based techniques improve gain by exciting multiple elements per port, but this also demands more radiators and larger substrate areas accordingly. Additionally, it is worth noting that using these traditional techniques makes the antenna size extremely increase when multi-port MIMO operation is required.

To overcome these drawbacks, this paper proposes an approach to design MIMO antenna with high-gain, compact, and multi-port operation based on a combination of dual-polarized radiators and hybrid couplers. Dual-polarized radiators offer two orthogonal polarizations from a single radiator, effectively halving the number of required elements for a given number of ports. Furthermore, hybrid couplers enable simultaneous excitation of both radiators, resulting in high gain operation. The measurement demonstrates that a 4-port MIMO antenna with compact dimensions of 0.96λ × 0.77λ × 0.04λ and high gain of around 8.0 dBi can be realized using the proposed approach. This compact and efficient architecture is highly suitable for space-constrained IoT terminals.

Dual-polarized radiator and hybrid coupler design

Dual-polarized radiator

Fig 1 illustrates the geometrical configuration of the dual-polarized patch antenna. The antenna is fabricated on a single-layer Taconic RF-35 substrate characterized by a relative permittivity of 3.5 and a low loss tangent of 0.002. The radiating patch is orthogonally fed via two coaxial feed points, enabling independent excitation of two orthogonal linear polarizations vertical and horizontal. The optimal dimensions of the antenna are as follows: Ws = 40, w = 15.7, d = 2.5 and h = 1.52 (unit: mm).

Fig 1. Geometry of the dual-polarized patch.

Fig 1

Fig 2 depicts the simulated S-parameter (reflection coefficient |S11| and transmission coefficient |S21|) and realized gain of the dual-polarized patch antenna. Obviously, the antenna shows good matching performance around the interested frequency band of 4.8 GHz, with reflection coefficient below -10 dB. Theoretically, the half-effective-wavelength square patch with dual feeding positions supports two dominant orthogonal modes, i.e., TM10 and TM01. When the antenna is excited through Port-1 (aligned along the x-axis), the field distribution establishes a null line characterized by zero electric potential along the orthogonal y-axis direction [20]. This field symmetry significantly suppresses energy coupling to the orthogonal Port-2, thereby achieving exceptionally high inter-port isolation. Here, the simulated isolation levels reach approximately 45 dB. Additionally, the simulated realized gain in the broadside direction at 4.8 GHz is about 7.1 dBi.

Fig 2. Simulated performance of the dual-polarized patch.

Fig 2

Hybrid coupler

The geometry of a hybrid coupler operating at 4.8 GHz is presented in Fig 3. The utilized substrate is the FR-4 substrate with a dielectric constant of 4.4 and a loss tangent of 0.02. Basically, hybrid coupler is a four-port passive microwave device used to equally split an input signal into two outputs with a specific phase difference of typically 90. Here, the power flows into Port-1 and then distributes to Port-2 and Port-3 with equal amplitude and 90 phase difference. Port-4 is an isolated port and ideally receives no power when Port-1 is fed. The line widths, w1 and w2, are chosen for their impedance of about 50 Ω and 35 Ω. The length l is about a quarter wavelength. The design parameters of the hybrid couple are as follows: w1 = 1.5, w2 = 2.6, l = 7.5, and hf = 0.8 (unit: mm).

Fig 3. Geometry of the hybrid coupler.

Fig 3

The simulated performance in terms of magnitude and phase of the hybrid coupler is depicted in Fig 4. It is obvious that around 4.8 GHz, the port matching performance is very good, with a dip in return loss at approximately -50 dB. Meanwhile, the transmission coefficients to the output ports, |S21| and |S31|, are nearly equal at approximately -3.5 dB, showing a balanced power split. The isolation between Port 1 and Port 4 is quite high at about 30 dB. With respect to the phase difference between Port 2 and Port 3, the simulated data indicates that the phase difference is around 90.

Fig 4. Simulated S-parameter of the hybrid coupler.

Fig 4

Four-port MIMO antenna

Antenna design

Fig 5 shows the geometry of the proposed 4-port MIMO antenna, which is a combination of two dual-polarized radiators and two hybrid couplers presented in the previous section. Two couplers, designated as C-1 and C-2, have four input ports including P-1, -2, -3, and -4. These couplers are implemented on a low-cost FR-4 substrate, as simulations confirmed its performance was adequate for the feeding network, while the low-loss Taconic RF-35 substrate was reserved for the radiating elements to maximize efficiency. Two dual-polarized radiators named Ant-1 and Ant-2 are rotated at 45 to ensure the symmetrical configuration for all port operations. The output ports of C-1 are F-1 and F-3, corresponding to dual feeding positions on Ant-1 and Ant-2. Noted that the polarizations of Ant-1 and Ant-2 with feeding positions at F-1 and F-3 are identical. The optimized dimensions of the proposed 4-port MIMO antenna are Ls = 70, Ws = 48, h = 1.52, hf = 0.8, w = 15.6, d = 2.4, w1 = 1.5, w2 = 2.3, l = 6.9, l1 = 4, l2 = 4.3, l3 = 9.2, and s = 6 (unit: mm).

Fig 5. Geometry of the proposed 4-port MIMO antenna.

Fig 5

Antenna performance

The simulated S-parameter and peak realized gain of the proposed 4-port MIMO antenna are depicted in Fig 6. Noted that the S-parameter for all ports is identical due to the symmetrical geometry, only the result for Port-1 operation is chosen to be shown. As observed, the antenna exhibits good performance around 4.8 GHz, in which the reflection coefficient and transmission coefficients are all below -10 dB. Meanwhile, the peak realized gain values are about 8.5 dBi within the operating frequency range from 4.74 to 4.85 GHz. In comparison with the dual-polarized antenna discussed in the previous section, the gain improvement is about 1.4 dBi. Additionally, the simulated radiation patterns at 4.8 GHz for different operating ports, as illustrated in Fig 7, show that the main beam is tilted off the broadside direction due to the different excitation phases (90) of the radiating elements. The main beam direction is similar for P-1, P-3 and P-2, P-4.

Fig 6. Simulated S-parameter and realized gain of the proposed 4-port MIMO antenna.

Fig 6

Fig 7. Simulated radiation patterns at 4.8 GHz of the proposed 4-port MIMO antenna.

Fig 7

Antenna operation characteristics

As described above, the design exploits the coupler as a power divider to excite both elements with similar magnitude. The operation can be depicted in Fig 8. Here, both antenna elements radiate with high aperture efficiency. Therefore, high gain radiation can be attained. This is different from typical 2-element MIMO systems where each element radiates separately. Meanwhile, the isolation is now controlled by the isolation of the coupler and the reflection coefficient of each antenna element. The diagrams demonstrate that perfect isolation of the system is achieved when the reflection coefficient is zero (S11(Ant−1) = 0 and S11(Ant−2) = 0) and the isolation of the coupler is perfect (S21(C) = 0). These two conditions are relatively easy to achieve by optimizing the coupler and the antenna separately. For the proposed 4-port MIMO design, the feeding positions of F-1 and F-3 will strongly affect the isolation between P-1 and P-2. Meanwhile, due to the high isolation between F-1 and F-2, F-3 and F-4 (demonstrated in Sect 2), the isolation between P-1 and P-3, P-4 will be high. Further demonstration can be observed in Fig 9, which shows the S-parameter of the proposed antenna with P-1 excitation with different feeding positions, d. Obviously at 4.8 GHz, changing d strongly affects the matching performance, and when the mismatch is worse, the isolation is significantly degraded.

Fig 8. Diagram of the antenna working with hybrid coupler.

Fig 8

Fig 9. Simulated |S21| for different feeding positions, d.

Fig 9

The simulated current distribution on the power dividers and radiating elements are illustrated in Fig 10. With P-1 excitation, the power is distributed to the two output ports to excite both radiating elements simultaneously, demonstrating the high gain performance. Meanwhile, the power distribution on the other input ports of the couplers (P-2, -3, and -4) is quite weak. This demonstrates the high isolation between the input ports.

Fig 10. Simulated current distribution at 4.8 GHz.

Fig 10

Element spacing plays a critical role in this antenna design, as it directly influences both the radiation performance and the compactness of the structure. The impedance matching and isolation can be fine-tuned by adjusting the hybrid dimensions and feeding position. Fig 11 shows the simulated gain radiation patterns at 4.8 GHz for different element spacing, s. As observed, the gain of the main lobe is slightly changed with the variation of s. However, larger element spacing leads to the emergence of higher grating lobes. When the distance is much larger than the ideal distance of half wavelength, it significantly degrades radiation pattern integrity.

Fig 11. Simulated gain radiation patterns at 4.8 GHz for different element spacing, s.

Fig 11

MIMO diversity performance

The MIMO diversity performance evaluated by Envelop Correlation Coefficient (ECC), Diversity Gain (DG), Channel Capacity Loss (CCL), and Mean Effective Gain (MEG) is investigated [24]. The ECC measures the correlation between radiation patterns of two MIMO antenna ports and the ECC smaller than 0.01 demonstrates the high-performance system. The DG represents the gain in signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) due to diversity compared to a single antenna system and the ideal value of DG is close to 10 dB. Meanwhile, the CCL shows maximum data rate that can be reliably transmitted using the MIMO system. This is computed based on S-parameter and the acceptable value of ECC is less than 0.4 bps/Hz. Finally, the MEG parameter shows a ratio of the average received power of each port to the total available power under a specific angular power distribution and MEG ratio of less than 3 dB is preferred. The calculated equations for these parameters can be found in [25]. The calculated ECC, DG, CCL, as well as MEG are presented in Figs 12 and 13. The data indicates that all calculated results are confined to acceptable values, which demonstrate good diversity performance of the proposed 4-port MIMO antenna.

Fig 12. Calculated ECC and DG of the proposed 4-port MIMO antenna.

Fig 12

Fig 13. Calculated CCL and MEG of the proposed 4-port MIMO antenna.

Fig 13

Measurement results

To experimentally validate the proposed design, a 4-port MIMO antenna prototype, as depicted in Fig 14, was fabricated and subjected to comprehensive measurements. Overall, the measured results exhibit strong agreement with full-wave simulation data, confirming the accuracy of the design approach. Minor discrepancies observed between simulated and measured results are attributed to fabrication tolerances, variations in the substrate’s dielectric constant, connector losses, and potential imperfections in the measurement setup.

Fig 14. Fabricated antenna prototype.

Fig 14

Fig 15 presents the simulated and measured S-parameters for P-1 excitation of the proposed 4-port MIMO antenna. The results confirm a common operating bandwidth (BW) ranging from 4.72 to 4.87 GHz, within which all ports exhibit return losses below -10 dB and inter-port isolation consistently exceeding 10 dB. There is a small difference with the simulated results, in which the operating BW ranges from 4.74 to 4.85 GHz. Due to the symmetrical structure of the antenna, the measured S-parameter results of other ports are quite similar to those of P-1. Accordingly, the far-field radiation patterns for P-1 excitation are representative and thus selected for analysis.

Fig 15. Measured P-1 S-parameter of the proposed antenna.

Fig 15

Fig 16 plots the gain radiation patterns in the principal E- and H- planes at 4.8 GHz. The main lobe of the proposed antenna is tilted approximately 25 off the broadside, which is due to the 90 phase difference introduced by the hybrid coupler. The measured maximum gain of about 8.0 dBi can be obtained in the direction of θ=25. Additionally, the cross-polarization radiation on this direction is about 23 dB smaller than the co-polarization radiation. This enhances communication reliability in multi-path environments. The measured cross-polarization is observed to be higher than the simulated levels. This discrepancy is likely caused by the influence of the coaxial feeding cables, whose placement can introduce field asymmetries, as well as minor unavoidable misalignments during the manual fabrication and assembly process.

Fig 16. Simulated and measured radiation patterns at 4.8 GHz with P-1 excitation.

Fig 16

A performance comparison among various MIMO design approaches is presented in Table 1. Here, different gain-enhancement techniques are involved in the table. Obviously, the method of using single or dual-polarized patches as MIMO elements has drawback of low gain. Among the gain enhancement techniques, while FSS-based approaches are effective in enhancing gain, they significantly increase the antenna’s vertical profile. On the other hand, T-divider-based architecture necessitates a greater number of radiating elements to achieve high gain performance, thereby resulting in larger and more cumbersome antenna arrays. When taking overall size, number of MIMO ports, as well as gain radiation into account, the proposed method obviously requires the smallest number of radiating elements, while achieving the largest number of MIMO ports and comparable gain.

Table 1. Performance comparison among various MIMO antenna design approaches.

Ref. Overall size (λ) MIMO configuration No. of elements No. of ports BW (%) Gain (dBi)
[4] 0.69 × 0.52 × 0.02 Single-pol. Patch 2 2 2.5 3.8
[5] 0.88 × 0.58 × 0.03 Single-pol. Patch 2 2 6
[8] 1.09 × 1.09 × 0.11 Dual-pol. Patch 4 8 12.8 6
[10] 2.94 × 2.94 × 0.09 Dual-pol. Patch 4 8 4.1 5.3
[15] 2.07 × 2.07 × 0.10 Single-pol. Patch + FSS 2 2 3.5 9.1
[17] 1.84 × 1.84 × 0.25 Single-pol. Patch + FSS 2 2 2.9 8.8
[18] 3.27 × 2.80 × 0.05 Single-pol. Patch + T-divider 8 4 3.5 11.5
[20] 2.24 × 2.24 × 0.07 Single-pol. Patch + T-divider 8 4 15.9 10.3
[21] 3.56 × 2.44 × 0.50 Single-pol. Patch + T-divider + FSS 8 4 7.6 10.3
[22] 2.14 × 1.16 × 0.16 Single-pol. Patch + T-divider + FSS 8 2 12.5 14.1
Prop. 0.96 × 0.77 × 0.04 Dual-pol. Patch + Coupler 2 4 3.1 8

Conclusion

This work presents a design methodology for a MIMO antenna system that simultaneously achieves multi-port operation, high gain performance, and compact physical dimensions. The proposed configuration integrates two dual-polarized patch antennas with two 90-degree hybrid couplers, thereby realizing a four-port high-gain MIMO array with only two radiating elements. To experimentally validate the concept, a prototype with compact dimensions of 0.96λ×0.77λ×0.04λ was fabricated and measured. The measured results achieve an operating BW of 3.1% (4.72-4.87 GHz), while maintaining inter-port isolation better than 10 dB and maximum gain of approximately 8.0 dBi. The data validates the suitability of the proposed antenna for high-efficiency, space-constrained MIMO applications. Besides, the proposed work can be further developed for massive MIMO systems.

Data Availability

All relevant data are within the manuscript.

Funding Statement

The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.

References

  • 1.Es-saleh A, Bendaoued M, Lakrit S, Das S, Faize A. Design aspects of MIMO antennas and its applications: a comprehensive review. Results in Engineering. 2025;25:103797. doi: 10.1016/j.rineng.2024.103797 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Qian B, Chen X, Zhao L, Chen J, Kishk AA. Reduced cross-polarization and backside radiations for rectangular microstrip antennas using defected ground structure combined with decoupling structure. Antennas Wirel Propag Lett. 2023;22(3):517–21. doi: 10.1109/lawp.2022.3217119 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Gao D, Cao Z-X, Fu S-D, Quan X, Chen P. A novel slot-array defected ground structure for decoupling microstrip antenna array. IEEE Trans Antennas Propagat. 2020;68(10):7027–38. doi: 10.1109/tap.2020.2992881 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Nguyen-Manh H, Pham D-P, Nguyen-Hoai G, Tran H-H, Dinh NQ. A design of MIMO antenna with high isolation and compact size characteristics. IEEE Access. 2023;11:93948–55. doi: 10.1109/access.2023.3309869 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Fang J, Li J, Xiao P, Dong J, Li G, Du S, et al. Coupling mode transformation-based dielectric surface and metasurface for antenna decoupler. IEEE Trans Antennas Propagat. 2023;71(1):1123–8. doi: 10.1109/tap.2022.3217178 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Li M, Zhong BG, Cheung SW. Isolation enhancement for MIMO patch antennas using near-field resonators as coupling-mode transducers. IEEE Trans Antennas Propagat. 2019;67(2):755–64. doi: 10.1109/tap.2018.2880048 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Wong K-L, Hong S-E, Tseng Y-S, Li W-Y. Low-profile compact 8-port MIMO antenna module and its 1 × 2 array for 6G 16 × 8 device MIMO application. IEEE Access. 2023;11:137011–24. doi: 10.1109/access.2023.3338731 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Wong K-L, Huang Y-Y, Li W-Y. Compact 8-port 2×2 array based on dual-polarized patch antennas with modified cavity field distribution for enhanced port isolation for 5G IoT device MIMO antennas. IEEE Access. 2024;12:79311–26. doi: 10.1109/access.2024.3409355 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Wong K-L, Wei T-C, Tseng Y-S, Li W-Y. Compact 2×2 dual-polarized patch antenna array transmitting eight uncorrelated waves for the WiFi-6E MIMO access point featuring eight spatial streams. IEEE Access. 2024;12:36793–809. doi: 10.1109/access.2024.3374378 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Zhang Y-M, Zhang S, Li J-L, Pedersen GF. A transmission-line-based decoupling method for MIMO antenna arrays. IEEE Trans Antennas Propagat. 2019;67(5):3117–31. doi: 10.1109/tap.2019.2900406 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Zhang X, Zhu L, Wu Q-S. Sidelobe-reduced and gain-enhanced square patch antennas with adjustable beamwidth under TM03Mode operation. IEEE Trans Antennas Propagat. 2018;66(4):1704–13. doi: 10.1109/tap.2018.2806220 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Pal J, Patra K, Gupta B. A tm 03 mode reduced side lobe high-gain printed antenna array in k band for udn and iot applications in 5g. International Journal of RF and Microwave Computer-Aided Engineering. 2020;30(11):e22394. [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Patel A, Upadhyaya T, Girjashankar PR, Swati MV, Kumar OP. Enhanced isolation in aperture fed dielectric resonator MIMO antennas for 5G Sub 6 GHz applications. Scientific Reports. 2025;15(1). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Rajat Girjashankar P, Upadhyaya T. Substrate integrated waveguide fed dual band quad-elements rectangular dielectric resonator MIMO antenna for millimeter wave 5G wireless communication systems. AEU - International Journal of Electronics and Communications. 2021;137:153821. doi: 10.1016/j.aeue.2021.153821 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Illahi MU, Khan MU, Hussain R, Tahir FA. A highly compact Fabry Perot cavity-based MIMO antenna with decorrelated fields. Sci Rep. 2022;12(1):14021. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-18050-w [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Hassan T, Khan MU, Attia H, Sharawi MS. An FSS based correlation reduction technique for MIMO antennas. IEEE Trans Antennas Propagat. 2018;66(9):4900–5. doi: 10.1109/tap.2018.2842256 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Salehi M, Oraizi H. Wideband high gain metasurface-based 4t4r mimo antenna with highly isolated ports for sub-6 ghz 5g applications. Scientific Reports. 2024;14(1):13280. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Bilal M, Naqvi SI, Hussain N, Amin Y, Kim N. High-isolation MIMO antenna for 5G millimeter-wave communication systems. Electronics. 2022;11(6):962. doi: 10.3390/electronics11060962 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Pant M, Malviya L. Design of a high-gain, low-ECC 2x2 MIMO antenna for 28 GHz 5G wireless communication system. Phys Scr. 2024;99(11):115520. doi: 10.1088/1402-4896/ad81bb [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Haque MdA, Ahammed MS, Ananta RA, Aljaloud K, Jizat NM, Abdulkawi WM, et al. Broadband high gain performance MIMO antenna array for 5G mm-wave applications-based gain prediction using machine learning approach. Alexandria Engineering Journal. 2024;104:665–79. doi: 10.1016/j.aej.2024.08.025 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Tariq S, Naqvi SI, Hussain N, Amin Y. A metasurface-based MIMO antenna for 5G millimeter-wave applications. IEEE Access. 2021;9:51805–17. doi: 10.1109/access.2021.3069185 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Francis F, Rosaline SI, Kumar RS. A broadband metamaterial superstrate based mimo antenna array for sub-6 ghz wireless applications. AEU International Journal of Electronics and Communications. 2024;173:155015. [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Ojo R, Jamlos MF, Soh PJ, Jamlos MA, Bahari N, Lee YS, et al. A trian- gular mimo array antenna with a double negative metamaterial superstrate to enhance bandwidth and gain. International Journal of RF and Microwave Computer-Aided Engineering. 2020;30(8):e22320. [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Mohanty A, Behera BR. Investigation of 2-port UWB MIMO diversity antenna design using characteristics mode analysis. AEU - International Journal of Electronics and Communications. 2020;124:153361. doi: 10.1016/j.aeue.2020.153361 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Mirmozafari M, Zhang G, Fulton C, Doviak RJ. Dual-polarization antennas with high isolation and polarization purity: a review and comparison of cross-coupling mechanisms. IEEE Antennas Propag Mag. 2019;61(1):50–63. doi: 10.1109/map.2018.2883032 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Sachin Kumar

17 Sep 2025

PONE-D-25-38799A compact design of four-port high-gain MIMO antenna using hybrid coupler and dual-polarized radiatorsPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Kim-Thi,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Nov 01 2025 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Sachin Kumar, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. Please note that PLOS One has specific guidelines on code sharing for submissions in which author-generated code underpins the findings in the manuscript. In these cases, we expect all author-generated code to be made available without restrictions upon publication of the work. Please review our guidelines at https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/materials-and-software-sharing#loc-sharing-code and ensure that your code is shared in a way that follows best practice and facilitates reproducibility and reuse.

3. If the reviewer comments include a recommendation to cite specific previously published works, please review and evaluate these publications to determine whether they are relevant and should be cited. There is no requirement to cite these works unless the editor has indicated otherwise. 

Additional Editor Comments:

The reviewers have provided positive feedback on your submitted manuscript and acknowledged its potential contribution. However, they have also raised certain concerns that need to be addressed in order to further improve the quality of the manuscript. We request you to carefully address all reviewer comments, revise the manuscript accordingly, and resubmit it for further evaluation.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: N/A

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: This manuscript presents a well-defined and valuable contribution to the field of MIMO antenna design. The authors propose a novel method for achieving a compact, high-gain, four-port MIMO antenna by integrating two dual-polarized radiators with two hybrid couplers. This approach cleverly uses the couplers to excite both radiating elements simultaneously from a single input port, thus achieving high gain while realizing a four-port system with only two radiating elements. The paper is well-structured, the methodology is sound, and the results are compelling. The experimental validation through a fabricated prototype confirms the viability of the proposed concept.

- The measured S-parameter results in Figure 14 show a slight frequency shift downwards compared to the simulated data. This is a very common effect and the authors' explanation of fabrication tolerance is appropriate. A brief sentence explicitly acknowledging this shift in the main text would show a thorough analysis of the results.

- The x-axis label in Figure 10, which displays gain radiation patterns, is incorrectly labelled as "Frequency (GHz)". This axis should represent the spatial angle in degrees (e.g., "Angle (degrees)" or " θ (degrees)"). Please correct this label.

- There is a notable inconsistency in the reported operating bandwidth. The Abstract states a bandwidth of 3.1% (4.72-4.87 GHz). However, the Conclusion reports a measured operating bandwidth of 2.1% (4.72-4.87 GHz). This is a significant discrepancy that must be corrected for consistency throughout the manuscript. Please verify update the text accordingly in all relevant sections.

- What was the primary reason for using FR-4 for the couplers instead of fabricating the entire device on the higher-performance Taconic substrate? Was this choice driven by cost, specific performance requirements for the coupler, or other manufacturing considerations?

- Regarding Figure 15, the measured cross-polarization is significantly higher than the simulated result. Beyond general tolerances, could you speculate on more specific causes?

Reviewer #2: The authors have proposed A compact design of four-port high-gain MIMO antenna using hybrid coupler and dual-polarized radiators. The following are the suggestions/observations

• The abstract should have all the antenna parameters.

• The gain values are expected to be mentioned in dBi across the manuscript.

• The introduction lacks depth significantly. You may refer the following articles along with other articles to enhance the depth.

o Enhanced isolation in aperture fed dielectric resonator MIMO antennas for 5G Sub 6 GHz applications. Scientific Reports, 15(1), p.10653.

o Substrate integrated waveguide fed dual band quad-elements rectangular dielectric resonator MIMO antenna for millimeter wave 5G wireless communication systems. AEU-international Journal of Electronics and Communications, 137, p.153821.

• The E field presentation needs to be better.

• Please check the S-parameter graph. The return loss at 4.7 GHz is going below the graph points

• If feasible, a normalized radiation pattern may be kept. Please improve the explanation of the radiation patterns.

• Please mention how 3D polar plots help in understanding gain in reference to 2D plots.

• The MIMO diversity parameters explanation needs to be strengthened.

• The result explanation is significantly lacking in depth.

• The conclusion should have a future scope included.

• Please remove obsolete references.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2025 Dec 11;20(12):e0337293. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0337293.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 1


3 Nov 2025

Submission ID: PONE-D-25-38799

Original Article Title: “A compact design of four-port high-gain MIMO antenna using hybrid coupler and dual-polarized radiators”

To: Reviewer

Re: Response to reviewer

Dear Reviewer,

We appreciate you for your precious time in reviewing our paper and providing valuable comments. It was your valuable and insightful comments that led to possible improvements in the current version. The authors have carefully considered the comments and tried our best to address every one of them.

We are uploading our point-by-point response to the comments, an updated manuscript with red highlighting indicating changes, and a manuscript without track changes.

Best regards,

Reviewer 1: This manuscript presents a well-defined and valuable contribution to the field of MIMO antenna design. The authors propose a novel method for achieving a compact, high-gain, four-port MIMO antenna by integrating two dual-polarized radiators with two hybrid couplers. This approach cleverly uses the couplers to excite both radiating elements simultaneously from a single input port, thus achieving high gain while realizing a four-port system with only two radiating elements. The paper is well-structured, the methodology is sound, and the results are compelling. The experimental validation through a fabricated prototype confirms the viability of the proposed concept.

Concern #1: The measured S-parameter results in Figure 14 show a slight frequency shift downwards compared to the simulated data. This is a very common effect and the authors' explanation of fabrication tolerance is appropriate. A brief sentence explicitly acknowledging this shift in the main text would show a thorough analysis of the results.

Author response: Thank you for this excellent suggestion. We agree that explicitly mentioning the frequency shift improves the analysis. As suggested, we have added a sentence to the second paragraph of “Measurement results” section to acknowledge this observation.

Author action: The last sentence of the first paragraph in Measurement results section is rewritten with an additional phrase to describe the cause of simulation and measurement discrepancies.

Concern #2: The x-axis label in Figure 10, which displays gain radiation patterns, is incorrectly labelled as "Frequency (GHz)". This axis should represent the spatial angle in degrees (e.g., "Angle (degrees)" or " θ (degrees)"). Please correct this label.

Author response: We sincerely thank the reviewer for identifying this error. The x-axis label in Figure 10 was indeed incorrect and was a typographical error.

Author action: We have corrected the x-axis label in the revised Figure 10. The label has been changed from "Frequency (GHz)" to "Theta (degrees)" to accurately represent the radiation pattern plot.

Concern #3: There is a notable inconsistency in the reported operating bandwidth. The Abstract states a bandwidth of 3.1% (4.72-4.87 GHz). However, the Conclusion reports a measured operating bandwidth of 2.1% (4.72-4.87 GHz). This is a significant discrepancy that must be corrected for consistency throughout the manuscript. Please verify update the text accordingly in all relevant sections.

Author response: We sincerely thank the reviewer for identifying this critical inconsistency. The value of 2.1% in the Conclusion was indeed a typo error.

Author action: The bandwidth value in the Conclusion has been modified.

Concern #4: What was the primary reason for using FR-4 for the couplers instead of fabricating the entire device on the higher-performance Taconic substrate? Was this choice driven by cost, specific performance requirements for the coupler, or other manufacturing considerations?

Author response: Thank you for this insightful question regarding our design choice. The decision to use FR-4 for the hybrid couplers while using Taconic RF-35 for the radiators was driven by a strategic balance between cost and performance.

� Cost-effectiveness: The primary reason was to reduce the overall fabrication cost. FR-4 is significantly more affordable than high-frequency laminates like Taconic RF-35. Using it for the feeding network layer makes the design more commercially viable.

� Performance trade-off: We performed simulations which confirmed that for the compact size of the hybrid couplers operating at 4.8 GHz, the additional insertion loss from the FR-4 substrate was minimal and had an acceptable impact on the antenna’s overall performance. Conversely, the radiating elements benefit much more significantly from the low-loss properties of the Taconic substrate, as this directly maximizes their radiation efficiency and gain.

We have added a brief clarification in the manuscript to make this design rationale clear to the reader.

Author action: The following sentence is added to the first paragraph of subsection Antenna design:

“These couplers are implemented on a low-cost FR-4 substrate, as simulations confirmed its performance was adequate for the feeding network, while the low-loss Taconic RF-35 substrate was reserved for the radiating elements to maximize efficiency.”

Concern #5: Regarding Figure 15, the measured cross-polarization is significantly higher than the simulated result. Beyond general tolerances, could you speculate on more specific causes?

Author response: We would like to thank Reviewer for this insightful comment. We acknowledge the discrepancy between the simulated and measured cross-polarization levels. While fabrication tolerances contribute, we agree that a more specific explanation is warranted. We believe the higher measured cross-polarization likely stems from a combination of the following factors:

� Effect of feeding cables: This is the most probable cause. In the measurement setup, the coaxial cables connected to the four ports can disrupt the field symmetry. Common-mode currents can be excited on the outer shield of these cables, which then act as unintentional radiators, degrading the polarization purity. This effect is challenging to model perfectly in simulation.

� Assembly and fabrication asymmetries: Minor asymmetries during fabrication and manual assembly, such as a slight rotational misalignment of the patch radiators or inconsistencies in the soldering of the coaxial feed probes, can disrupt the ideal orthogonal current modes, leading to increased coupling between them and thus higher cross-polarization.

� Measurement environment: Although conducted in an anechoic chamber, minor reflections or scattering from the antenna positioning equipment could also contribute to the measured cross-polarization levels.

We have added a brief discussion of these points in the manuscript to provide a more thorough analysis of the results.

Author action: The following sentences are added to the third paragraph of the section Measurement results: The measured cross-polarization is observed to be higher than the simulated levels. This discrepancy is likely caused by the influence of the coaxial feeding cables, whose placement can introduce field asymmetries, as well as minor unavoidable misalignments during the manual fabrication and assembly process.

Reviewer 2: The authors have proposed A compact design of four-port high-gain MIMO antenna using hybrid coupler and dual-polarized radiators. The following are the suggestions/observations.

Concern #1: The abstract should have all the antenna parameters.

Author response: Agreed.

Author action: More antenna parameters have been included in Abstract of the revised manuscript.

Concern #2: The gain values are expected to be mentioned in dBi across the manuscript.

Author response: Agreed.

Author action: The unit of gain has been modified in the revised manuscript.

Concern #3: The introduction lacks depth significantly. You may refer the following articles along with other articles to enhance the depth.

a. Enhanced isolation in aperture fed dielectric resonator MIMO antennas for 5G Sub 6 GHz applications. Scientific Reports, 15(1), p.10653.

b. Substrate integrated waveguide fed dual band quad-elements rectangular dielectric resonator MIMO antenna for millimeter wave 5G wireless communication systems. AEU-international Journal of Electronics and Communications, 137, p.153821.

Author response: The authors would like to thank the Reviewer for the constructive comment.

Author action: The suggested references have been included in the revised manuscript as references [13, 14]. Additionally, further discussion is also added to Paragraph 2, Section “Introduction”.

Concern #4: The E field presentation needs to be better.

Author response: Agreed.

Author action: The figure quality is enhanced in the revised manuscript.

Concern #5: Please check the S-parameter graph. The return loss at 4.7 GHz is going below the graph points.

Author response: The operating frequency of the proposed antenna ranges from 4.72 to 4.87 GHz. Thus, the |S41| at 4.7 GHz is out of this range, and the author believes that this value might not be important.

Concern #6: If feasible, a normalized radiation pattern may be kept. Please improve the explanation of the radiation patterns.

Author response: The authors concur with the Reviewer that normalized radiation patterns provide a clearer comparison between co- and cross-polarization components. However, since normalized patterns do not include actual gain values, the authors consider the use of real radiation patterns to be more appropriate in this case.

Concern #7: Please mention how 3D polar plots help in understanding gain in reference to 2D plots.

Author response: The 2D plots (as shown in Fig. 14) are more useful than 3D plots with respect to the co- and cross-polarization radiation. Fig. 6b shows 3D plots for better observation of different beam directions for different MIMO ports.

Concern #8: The MIMO diversity parameters explanation needs to be strengthened.

Author response: The authors would like to thank the Reviewer for the constructive comment. As the MIMO diversity performance in terms of ECC, DG, CCL, and MEG has been thoroughly investigated in [R1], the authors just briefly discussed the threshold values and meaning of each parameter in the manuscript.

[R1] https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aeue.2020.153361

Author action: Ref [R1] is added to the revised manuscript as ref [22].

Concern #9: The result explanation is significantly lacking in depth.

Author response: The authors would like to thank the Reviewer for the constructive comment.

Author action: Further experiment result discussion is added to the revised manuscript.

Concern #10: The conclusion should have a future scope included.

Author response: Agreed.

Author action: A future scope is added to Conclusion of the revised manuscript.

Concern #11: Please remove obsolete references.

Author response: The authors agree with the Reviewer that citing more recent works is more appropriate. Accordingly, all references in this paper are noteworthy, and the authors have selected studies published from 2018 onward. Only reference [1] is considered outdated.

Author action: Ref [1] is replaced in the revised manuscript.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response letter.docx

pone.0337293.s001.docx (34.4KB, docx)

Decision Letter 1

Sachin Kumar

7 Nov 2025

A compact design of four-port high-gain MIMO antenna using hybrid coupler and dual-polarized radiators

PONE-D-25-38799R1

Dear Dr. Kim-Thi,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice will be generated when your article is formally accepted. Please note, if your institution has a publishing partnership with PLOS and your article meets the relevant criteria, all or part of your publication costs will be covered. Please make sure your user information is up-to-date by logging into Editorial Manager at Editorial Manager® and clicking the ‘Update My Information' link at the top of the page. For questions related to billing, please contact billing support.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Sachin Kumar, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: N/A

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: The review comments have been adequately addressed. No further revisions/modifications are required.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

Acceptance letter

Sachin Kumar

PONE-D-25-38799R1

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Kim-Thi,

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now being handed over to our production team.

At this stage, our production department will prepare your paper for publication. This includes ensuring the following:

* All references, tables, and figures are properly cited

* All relevant supporting information is included in the manuscript submission,

* There are no issues that prevent the paper from being properly typeset

You will receive further instructions from the production team, including instructions on how to review your proof when it is ready. Please keep in mind that we are working through a large volume of accepted articles, so please give us a few days to review your paper and let you know the next and final steps.

Lastly, if your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

You will receive an invoice from PLOS for your publication fee after your manuscript has reached the completed accept phase. If you receive an email requesting payment before acceptance or for any other service, this may be a phishing scheme. Learn how to identify phishing emails and protect your accounts at https://explore.plos.org/phishing.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at customercare@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Sachin Kumar

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response letter.docx

    pone.0337293.s001.docx (34.4KB, docx)

    Data Availability Statement

    All relevant data are within the manuscript.


    Articles from PLOS One are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES